Illegal tax collection on export sales was refundable, with civil jurisdiction and limitation not barring the refund suit.

Money collected as sales tax on export sales and later declared unlawful was treated as a non-gratuitous payment made under statutory compulsion, so the assessee was entitled to refund. The court also held that the special limitation period under the sales tax law did not govern a levy collected without lawful authority; the refund suits were within time under the applicable limitation rule. Because the collection was outside the statute's lawful ambit, the civil court's jurisdiction was not excluded by the statutory bar on suits arising under valid assessments or orders. The refund claims therefore succeeded.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether sales tax paid on export sales, later declared illegal, was refundable as a non-gratuitous payment under coercion; (ii) whether the refund suits were barred by limitation; (iii) whether the civil court's jurisdiction was excluded by the sales tax law.

Issue (i): whether sales tax paid on export sales, later declared illegal, was refundable as a non-gratuitous payment under coercion.

Analysis: Money paid towards a tax that is later found to be unlawfully levied is not a voluntary gift to the Government. The payment is made under the compulsion inherent in a statutory levy and is therefore a non-gratuitous payment. Once the levy on export sales was declared illegal, the taxing authority was bound to refund the amount to the assessee, leaving any adjustment between vendor and purchaser to private arrangement.

Conclusion: The amount was refundable and the objection based on voluntariness failed.

Issue (ii): whether the refund suits were barred by limitation.

Analysis: The special limitation applicable to refund claims under the sales tax law applies only where the collection was made within the competence of that law. Where the levy itself is outside lawful authority, the claim is governed by the general law of limitation. Even on the special basis, time would run at the latest from the declaration that the levy was illegal, and the suits were brought within that period.

Conclusion: The suits were within limitation and were not time-barred.

Issue (iii): whether the civil court's jurisdiction was excluded by the sales tax law.

Analysis: A statutory bar on civil suits applies only to assessments or orders made under the authority of the special enactment. If the taxing authority acts without jurisdiction or beyond the scope of the statute, the matter is not one arising under that law and the ordinary civil jurisdiction remains available. Since the collection on export sales was held to be unlawful, the exclusion clause could not bar the suits.

Conclusion: The civil court had jurisdiction to entertain the refund suits.

Final Conclusion: The appeals failed on all material grounds and the assessees were entitled to refund of the tax collected on the illegal levy.

Ratio Decidendi: Money collected as tax without legal authority is recoverable as a non-gratuitous payment, and statutory bars or special limitation provisions apply only where the impugned act is within the lawful ambit of the taxing enactment.

---